I don't use Photolab 7, but I do use DXO PureRaw 4 to render the Raw file into a .DNG before making simple edits in Apple Photos using Photomator. The quality of image PureRaw pulls out of the Canon 6D Raw file is exceptionally good using the DeepPrime XD 2 option. First rate rendering, lens distortion, chromatic aberration and lens softness corrections all feature in PureRaw 4, so presumably also in the Elite version of Photolab 7 (?).
I second this. There are some lenses (esp super zooms) that I had basically written off in terms of being able to produce a high quality image at many focal lengths (e.g. fuji 18-135 at the =>55mm focal length). Then using pureraw 2, they become vastly improved, and little inferior to the excellent red badge lenses (e.g. the 50-140)
I've watched several v8 videos and was on the fence whether or not to buy v8 or stay with LR. I'm staying with LR. V8 doesn't do enough to make it worth switching. Thanks for a good comparison.
The better option for me, would be to find a photo management software, that is equally capable to LRc, then I would switch in an instant, because there are so many great raw editors, you could get a couple of them for flexibility and still come out creatively and financially on top. I suspect it will take decades.
The reason Lightroom took off is because they proved your RAW editor and image management work best as one. You other companies like DXO have to catch up to be competitive.
I made the jump a couple of weeks ago, and DxO PhotoLab 7 has been brilliant, especially in combination with DxO Nik Collection (which I already had and have used since Nik was it's own company). I've no found PL7's lesser DAM functionality to be a big deal as my organizational scheme does the heavy lifting on that anyway. I would like PL7 to recognize my legacy Ps files and the Affinity Photo 2 files I now create for some tasks. But all in all, I've been extremely pleased with my move and it surprisingly painless. 👍
Okay, now there's two things I really enjoy with PL. In addition to the chroma adjustment on masks, they actually HAVE LUT's. not mixing it up and calling it camera profile like LRc. But the inconsistencies are a darn killer. PL could be a whole lot better. It's quite easy to get going and to use, but I'm not sure user friendliness are at the top just yet. I do love that they keep the files where they are and not making a database like LRc uses. It's a simpler approach and your operating system already supports tagging, scoring, flagging, commenting etc. So they should heavily utillize those capabilities and just bring them out into PL. Far from that point just now.
Yes the LUTS are cool. I mentioned those in my first review and even use them with my Filmist luts. But until get get processing basics like HSL and color grading sorted out it's hard to use it for serious work. The lack of a catalog is not really a benefit when you lack tons of features as payment for it.
PL7 is the best minimalist setup, especially for an amateur like myself. I do find Lightroom Classic editing more enjoyable though. I definitely prefer the file management setup in PL since I just keep my folders simple (Full, Edits, Final Edits). But I'm not a PRO level editor
I'll compare it to code. Nowadays you got pros making money who use a free code editor called vscode that make a good living while only doing things in one window. Sometimes less is more. Sometimes more is more. Depends. Life isn't full of easy answers. You got something that works.
Thanks, good points. I think you summed it up pretty well. As for the denoise you didn't really let us know what settings you used, but it's true that odd sharpening/artifacts can happen if overused; currently testing DxO PL8 and DxO PureRaw myself and I find that the latest XD2s denoise really is the best available in standalone 3rd party software (i.e. not LR or Capture One which I consider the main processing apps) and although their PureRaw is basically a plugin for Lightroom I found that PL8 works way better as a secondary noise reduction product to Capture One. Like you, I add film grain back after noise reduction and I found that DxO's XD2s works well on images shot on high ISO like 16k (ones I'm testing); it's worth noting that the suggested XD2s auto noise setting is only 40% for the high ISO I'm testing atm and typically I like to add about 50-70% "force details" to add a decent amount of details which happens to tame the default sharpening that DxO adds. However, one of the best things besides the fab denoise it's the support for cameras/lenses corrections and the ability to add the right colour rendering based on your camera. Using these and DxO white balance priort to export will provide a great image back in Capture One where I do my final adjustments; the combination of using these colour adjustments prior export in DxO provides a way better image than other denoise tools like Denaoise AI or even DxO's own PureRaw 4. Perhaps those who have LR/PS subscription already don't need additional denoise programs any more, but one of Capture One's main shortcomings apart from being behind in terms of masking compared to LR is their dated denoise/sharpening tools and PL8, although not really designed to be used as such is likely the best solution for Capture One users imo, a rather costly one but likely worth it especially if discounted. I summary I completely agree with you, especially from a LR user perspective, but would add that DxO is the best denoise "plugin" for Capture One users who need an extra tool unlike LR users.
I have absolutely no issue with paying Adobe every month. Very happy with what I receive from Adobe in fact prefer this method as I am always updated to the latest software. One time purchase requires payment for each upgrade. Works out to be very similar cost. I have used LR and Nik for years and have the latest version of both.
Just like camera equipment, not everyone needs the latest and greatest. I still use Photolab 2 and happy with it. Did not pay a single cent since 2019.
Thanks for sharing this. I have used DxO PL6 and Lightroom Classic quite a bit, and I find that PL6 is not as broad in its capabilities. Even though there would still not be a 1:1 match of features, including other DxO products (e.g., the Nik suite) might partially offset what PL is missing. But I agree that the LRc's masking is a major differentiator. On the other hand, my impression is that PL6 does a better job with raw developing, assuming that you've used a supported camera-lens combination. I've also used OnOne, but not much recently. It seems to match the feature set of LRc more than PL6. I will look forward to your review of it.
I think Generative AI and masking is still LR/PS's ace in the hole. Photolab renders color considerably better than Adobe, but it's still missing a few features to rely on on it solely.
if I just want something for fixing noise, should I just buy DxO PureRAW4? or if I buy DxO PhotoLab7, do I still need to buy PureRaw4?? appreciate your input, just found out about this program after having issues with Topaz Labs and their bad denoising AI.
As I saw in the noise tests this seems to have most of SXO noise tools but I believe the latest version of pure RAW has a touch more. Thatg said LR or C! do just fine with noise. As I've showed in other videos most photos are better with some noise left in.
DxO does have presets. Moreover it lets you edit them on top of the image you are currently working on and saving the changes. Very powerful. The preset can include a LUT and all the sliders which you like to adjust as your baseline. I have ten which I've hand-rolled which I use. Saves a ton of time. Give PhotoLab presets another look. You'll have to repost this video as your main objection to PhotoLab is the absence of presets, which just isn't true. What PhotoLab is missing on the other hand, is image comparison. It's not possible to put two images side by side without export and using other software. I'm on the opposite end as you. I'm expert in PhotoLab and competent in Lightroom (used v3 and v4 seriously).
Sorry not sure what you mean. That was not an objection. I clearly said there were presets and showed how they work. My gripe was the limits in the options when saving a preset compared to LR or C1.
Thanks for your note,@@Seimstudios. That's now what I saw in your video. At this point, you are clearly not competent in PhotoLab. At least make an effort, Seim. I've told you about the presets and what can be done with them. Go and try them. Use them, make some of your own. I mean really, make a bit of an effort or your video is as useless as the other two hundred incompetent software comparison videos.
@@Seimstudios There are no limitations. Try to use the software as written instead of imposing the Lightroom model on top of it. If all software should be like Lightroom, why on earth would anyone use any software except Lightroom? Your way of judging software is simply take an existing application and judge how good a clone it is of an application you already use. Poor work, Seim. You can do better.
@@Seimstudios And now instead of digging in and doing the testing properly, you feign not to understand to justify the weak review. If you won't take the time to learn a piece of software, you shouldn't be reviewing it.
You can fully customize presets in DxO, just like you showed in Lightroom. The interface is just different (you just looked in the wrong place), but the full ability to customize the presets is there, and very powerful. (I have plenty of gripes about Photolab, but preset functionality is excellent).
What version is this DXO Photolab? Is this version 8? If it isn't, have you used it and what do you think of it? Has it improved on some of the criticisms you indicated?
@@SeimstudiosI was in the middle of watching your video while reading the comments. Unfortunately, this comment about version 8 is simply untrue. There are lots of improvements. Careful with that credibility.
Thanks for the video it was quick but I think when you added the second control point it might have been grouped/linked with the first one since the masked seemed to still show the jumper.
I do like the comparisons between the software packages - I have the LR/PS subscription which I don't find too overly expensive. I also have PL7 - like all programs there are some tools/modules that work well or work well with certain images. PL7 has some of those & it is easy to bounce back & forth to LR so I use it also. I did think this video was a little long so I watched it in pieces - maybe keeping them to around 15 minutes seems to work but I understand that some topics can't be fit into that time frame. As for people making personal comments & using profanity & just overall poor behavior & commentary - all I can say is have some grace & maturity - this is damn good free content & if you feel that Gavin talks too fast etc. or packs too much content into what he's saying there are more constructive ways to raise those points.
If I had done this in 15 you would have have gotten a complete review. This is why I don't do a lot of in depth reviews. Because people really don't have the attention span for them. Then I try to slice them tight and they say it's too fast lol
I am still using Lightroom 6.14 and PS CS6 because I refuse to pay Adobe monthly fees. Does DxO use folders like LR for both importing photos and exporting edited folders? If not, maybe I should consider On1 PhotoRaw? Thank you!
I get that. Although LR+PS are still cheaper that DXO, Capture One etc. But yes, if you simply don't want to support cloud go with something like DXO because LR6 is old now. I still support it with my presets for example. But it's getting harder every year.
I'm still using Lightroom 5 and was intending to upgrade to Lightroom Classic, but with all the issues with Adobe, I've been looking at alternatives. Lightroom Classic is quite a jump up from what I'm using. Is there one of the other programs that it similar to what I'm using that I could go over to?
Capture One is an option. But still subscription and costs more for less. DXO is a decent option for most however, though it's not as fleshed out as LR or C1
@@Seimstudios Thanks Seim, I really appreciate your recommendation. I'm just not into the subscription model, so Capture One most likely won't work for me despite being similar to Lightroom. I'll upgrade to DXO and give it a go. While almost nothing has improved as you mentioned, it is likely quite an improvement for me coming from Lightroom 5 :)
Thanks for this video. I am using DxO photoLab as a plugin for Lightroom and it is perfect. I am also using Exposure 7 . It is an excellent program that uses intelligent color masks for years. As a portrait photographer, it allow controlling skin colors and a lot of other things independently of the color position and faces positions and expressions. Concerning Adobe subscription model , it is becoming a monster everyone should avoid. Maybe a giant Boycott for Adobe products would come to be less greedy and lower the prices
There really no need to use two RAw editors. Since LR does the same things as DXO, using one inside the other is pretty redundant for any practical workflow and in the end will likely reduce image quality. But if it's working for you cool.
LR is far ahead with masking but for frustrated C1 user PL is a very good alternative as the AI tools in C1 do not really work as advertised anyway. from a core Image quality standpoint PL wins imho too because of deep prime and better color rendering compared to C1.
Місяць тому
One very important thing you did not mention is de mozaik in which lc sucks and capture one and dxo shine
LR is equal to or better than C1 in noise and details now. I've mentioned in many times it's just the people advertising for C1 keep pretending it's better without doing the side by side reviews I have done in other videos.
Місяць тому
@@Seimstudios Let s agree to disagree because we are not talking about the same thing 😊
I am using DXO recently on a macbook. What really annoys me is that I cant move files or virtual copies from and to projects. It only copies. Does anyone has a solution (alt, shift + drag doesnt seem to work).
Hey, thanks for doing some DxO homework for me, I am wondering about batch processing. Is there a sync button? My workflow is about 10 to 50 shots of a setup, usually with a color checker at the beginning, so can settings be copy/pasted, or is there another way of getting same settings to many files?
Good overall comparison review Gav. I have DxO 6 and was thinking about upgrading but have not, and after watching your comparison, I do not think I will. I also have been using ON1 Photo Raw as well. My thinking was just spend the time using one new software instead of trying to learn two different ones at the same time. I did get into mirrorless in the last year and a half, so my CS6 and LR6.14 don't work with my Nikon Z files. I was wondering what you thought of ON1 Photo Raw and if you might do a review on it and/or make your presets and packages available to use with ON1 also. Thanks, Vinnie
Thanks for this video. After going down the Darktable rabbit hole for a couple of weeks, DXO was going to be my next program to look at. I shoot a lot of bracketed photos and bracketed panoramas. Having to use another piece of software to blend the images isn't going to work for me.
Thank Seim for this video. However, it's outdated because Photo lab 8 has been released. If possible, could you please do another video Lightroom & Photolab 8? Thanks again.
The only thing that would impress me and have me dropping every other program for Photolab is if photolab had a AI precision masking tool, the other apps have it, but photolab is still behind in this? Why? It’s frustrating to see them focus on every other feature expect for AI masking. What’s the point of all these features if I can’t easily make a targeted selection?
@@Seimstudios Right, and as much as I like how better Capture One processes the images, and the abilities of DXO, LR is still superior in workflow and targeted adjustments. LR also just feels right, it feels comfortable using it! But PH and C1 doesn’t seem to care about design and workflow and integration.
I have Lightroom never tried DXO Photo Lab I might give it a try but I use a Affinity Photo and have so for years its not prefect but they recently become part of Canva group. You have mentioned Affinity Photo but you have never done any videos or any comparisons on them or where you think they need to be for pro uses.
Just tested it and from what I can tell it's no better. IN fact in the hard light test I use an all these appas LR did a bit better. Still it did a good job.
Not worth it... new license 230 euros, upgrade every year 100 euros. Only one program... Adobe gives PS, LR, cloud for 120 a year. Dxo's greed knows no limits. A lot of people give up because it's really funny
Ehhh your not forced to upgrade every year. You can probably easy skip a version or 2. Same goes with cameras. You can 100% take great photos with an older camera.
Місяць тому
Yes you right, i use adobe and silkypix pro 11, i dont care about UA-cam People Who now begin promote dxo,. Not listen to Them
In addition, if you skip DXO's upgrades to the new version, you will lose the right to a discounted upgrade and will have to pay the full price for the new version. In reality, you won’t save money by using DXO compared to, for example, Adobe Lightroom. Or maybe you will save if you skip a few years of version upgrades.
Software has always been a license to use it since it started with the first PCs. Adobe does not shot down LR when you stop paying it and gives you a year with no updates. I own DXO and consider it a yearly subscription as they come out with a new version every year around Christmas time with a Black Friday sale. I upgraded from DXO 6 to 7 for $89 last year and there was NOT $89 of updates. I will continue to use LR as it is the best DAM application for my 1 million photos in my catalog.
LR is good. But you're remembering how software worked when we bought it. If you stop paying for LR it will stop working in 30 days and you will be locked out of your photos.
Buying vs subscriptcion - Subscriptcions cost a very small amount monthly and you have all the new opdates, buying cost a lot DXO8 about 300 Euro if you use a Fujifilm camera (you need the elite edition + the filmpack) then after 6 - 12 months you probely need or want to upgrade again for last fuctions and supportet cameras and lenses. So the buying version will be same expencive like the monthly payments. DXO 8 is nice but still fare behind Lightroom and Photoshop in posibilities it cost only monthly US$9.99. Its a no brainer.
@@Seimstudios I did not say price is the only factor, but also its fare behind Lightroom/Photoshop in relevant posibillities. However its a grait RAW coverter if thats all you need.
@@terjegronli142it’s actually not behind LR in image quality. Maybe some workflow items for those addicted to AI. Or, if you’re big on compositing. Of course, that’s fine if that’s what you want. But PL demosaicing, noise handling, soft lens management, and overall image quality output isn’t second to anyone.
PhotoLab 8 just came out with some nice new improvements - sadly, the spots you’ve 😮 dinged them on hasn't really changed much. There's the newer deep prime XD2 (but doesn't _yet_ support Fuji.
Exposure should not be used in a preset in general. But the presets I create don't have an equal in the industry. Not using presets just means you're getting less creative edits honestly. It's fine to make your own, but not using presets is less consistency , less speed and less creative control. It just means you're not using the software.
Instead of digging in and doing the testing properly, you feign not to understand to justify the weak review. If you won't take the time to learn a piece of software, you shouldn't be reviewing it. You can do better. (this is a comment buried in replies above; it should be top-level)
Nothing weak about my review. Im, an expert in Raw editing. That's why I review software for it. This review is quite fair and not even negative so honestly I don't known what your on about bro.
@@Seimstudios Based on this review, you've spent a tiny amount of time with DxO PhotoLab, not opened the manual and have no clue about how PhotoLab presets work. The saddest part is you think you've made an unbiased review, when it's completely Lightroom and C1 centric without much notion of how to do good work in PhotoLab and less idea on how to work efficiently in PhotoLab. Saying you are an expert does not make you an expert, showing expertise makes an expert an expert. Why don't I tell you how to work better in PhotoLab? - I am. Go and work again with the Presets function which is very, very powerful. Create the presets you need and you can start any kind of photo edit very quickly and in the right place. Oh and make sure to customise your toolsets to put the tools you actually use in basic view and in the order you use them. But nothing extra. Tools you use more rarely you can dig out of Light, Colour, Detail, Geometry when needed.
Forget about the idea, perpetual license is an illusion. we are always controlled by software company and will be in the future no matter what choice you make. Nothing is perpetual, no,. I had been using Apple Aperture before Adobe has lightroom. Apple stopped update and Aperture version I "owned" no longer supported in newer OS, no support for newer camera model. I bought Nik ware back it the day it costed 499US, if I have to use it today, I still need to pay DXO. Someday you have to pay again, you have to migrate somewhere. Welcome to the real world.
Rawtherapee handles large folders of raw files bet😢ter than darktable on my Mac, which makes culling much better in RT vs DT. I used both extensively. Now transferred what I learned to LR and it's just so much faster for editing. The UX difference is substantial and I think that's what he means by 'primitive' as I would agree. Both DT and RT are primitive - powerful but primitive.
@@TheLocalredhead Maybe it's a mac problem, because I have completely different experience - even on my travel laptop, which is pretty weak, DT handles photos without any problems. UI is just a matter of habit and muscle memory, but I can agree - FOSS applications are very technical at times because they are usually made by technical guys, personally, I like this approach. In terms of color science and overall workflow DT is far superior.
Who doesn't care what platform or device you are using to work on? Adobe. Who only works with a computer and a very few iPads? Everyone else. Being dependent on a computer for working, is like still living in mom's basement.
I'm sure this is a good video with solid information. Sadly I didnt make it past the 5 minute mark because of your sheer pace. Chill the fuck out dude :D I dont mean this in a bad way, you seem like you know a fuckton and have loads of value to give, but it's simply too much information.. and the video is looong! I think you could learn something regarding pacing from Simon d'Entremont. He packs loads of knowledge into his videos aswell, but he does so in a calmer and more distilled way. Also his videos are shorter. I think you'd benefit greatly from this!
Sorry bro. You can have an overview or a thorough review. Not both. I have plenty of short videos but it didn't work here. The problem is people no longer have an attention span thanks to TikTok
Not talking too fast, but I don’t like how all the umms and aaahhs have been edited out. Please keep them so your speech sounds natural. And leave a little pause when you change thoughts. It sounds like one long paragraph.
I don't use Photolab 7, but I do use DXO PureRaw 4 to render the Raw file into a .DNG before making simple edits in Apple Photos using Photomator. The quality of image PureRaw pulls out of the Canon 6D Raw file is exceptionally good using the DeepPrime XD 2 option. First rate rendering, lens distortion, chromatic aberration and lens softness corrections all feature in PureRaw 4, so presumably also in the Elite version of Photolab 7 (?).
I second this. There are some lenses (esp super zooms) that I had basically written off in terms of being able to produce a high quality image at many focal lengths (e.g. fuji 18-135 at the =>55mm focal length). Then using pureraw 2, they become vastly improved, and little inferior to the excellent red badge lenses (e.g. the 50-140)
I've watched several v8 videos and was on the fence whether or not to buy v8 or stay with LR. I'm staying with LR. V8 doesn't do enough to make it worth switching. Thanks for a good comparison.
The better option for me, would be to find a photo management software, that is equally capable to LRc, then I would switch in an instant, because there are so many great raw editors, you could get a couple of them for flexibility and still come out creatively and financially on top. I suspect it will take decades.
Image development and image management should be two distinct softwares.
The reason Lightroom took off is because they proved your RAW editor and image management work best as one. You other companies like DXO have to catch up to be competitive.
I made the jump a couple of weeks ago, and DxO PhotoLab 7 has been brilliant, especially in combination with DxO Nik Collection (which I already had and have used since Nik was it's own company). I've no found PL7's lesser DAM functionality to be a big deal as my organizational scheme does the heavy lifting on that anyway.
I would like PL7 to recognize my legacy Ps files and the Affinity Photo 2 files I now create for some tasks.
But all in all, I've been extremely pleased with my move and it surprisingly painless. 👍
Okay, now there's two things I really enjoy with PL. In addition to the chroma adjustment on masks, they actually HAVE LUT's. not mixing it up and calling it camera profile like LRc. But the inconsistencies are a darn killer. PL could be a whole lot better. It's quite easy to get going and to use, but I'm not sure user friendliness are at the top just yet. I do love that they keep the files where they are and not making a database like LRc uses. It's a simpler approach and your operating system already supports tagging, scoring, flagging, commenting etc. So they should heavily utillize those capabilities and just bring them out into PL. Far from that point just now.
Yes the LUTS are cool. I mentioned those in my first review and even use them with my Filmist luts. But until get get processing basics like HSL and color grading sorted out it's hard to use it for serious work. The lack of a catalog is not really a benefit when you lack tons of features as payment for it.
PL7 is the best minimalist setup, especially for an amateur like myself. I do find Lightroom Classic editing more enjoyable though. I definitely prefer the file management setup in PL since I just keep my folders simple (Full, Edits, Final Edits). But I'm not a PRO level editor
I'll compare it to code. Nowadays you got pros making money who use a free code editor called vscode that make a good living while only doing things in one window. Sometimes less is more. Sometimes more is more. Depends. Life isn't full of easy answers. You got something that works.
Thanks, good points. I think you summed it up pretty well.
As for the denoise you didn't really let us know what settings you used, but it's true that odd sharpening/artifacts can happen if overused; currently testing DxO PL8 and DxO PureRaw myself and I find that the latest XD2s denoise really is the best available in standalone 3rd party software (i.e. not LR or Capture One which I consider the main processing apps) and although their PureRaw is basically a plugin for Lightroom I found that PL8 works way better as a secondary noise reduction product to Capture One.
Like you, I add film grain back after noise reduction and I found that DxO's XD2s works well on images shot on high ISO like 16k (ones I'm testing); it's worth noting that the suggested XD2s auto noise setting is only 40% for the high ISO I'm testing atm and typically I like to add about 50-70% "force details" to add a decent amount of details which happens to tame the default sharpening that DxO adds.
However, one of the best things besides the fab denoise it's the support for cameras/lenses corrections and the ability to add the right colour rendering based on your camera. Using these and DxO white balance priort to export will provide a great image back in Capture One where I do my final adjustments; the combination of using these colour adjustments prior export in DxO provides a way better image than other denoise tools like Denaoise AI or even DxO's own PureRaw 4.
Perhaps those who have LR/PS subscription already don't need additional denoise programs any more, but one of Capture One's main shortcomings apart from being behind in terms of masking compared to LR is their dated denoise/sharpening tools and PL8, although not really designed to be used as such is likely the best solution for Capture One users imo, a rather costly one but likely worth it especially if discounted.
I summary I completely agree with you, especially from a LR user perspective, but would add that DxO is the best denoise "plugin" for Capture One users who need an extra tool unlike LR users.
I have absolutely no issue with paying Adobe every month. Very happy with what I receive from Adobe in fact prefer this method as I am always updated to the latest software. One time purchase requires payment for each upgrade. Works out to be very similar cost. I have used LR and Nik for years and have the latest version of both.
Just like camera equipment, not everyone needs the latest and greatest. I still use Photolab 2 and happy with it. Did not pay a single cent since 2019.
Thanks for sharing this. I have used DxO PL6 and Lightroom Classic quite a bit, and I find that PL6 is not as broad in its capabilities. Even though there would still not be a 1:1 match of features, including other DxO products (e.g., the Nik suite) might partially offset what PL is missing. But I agree that the LRc's masking is a major differentiator. On the other hand, my impression is that PL6 does a better job with raw developing, assuming that you've used a supported camera-lens combination.
I've also used OnOne, but not much recently. It seems to match the feature set of LRc more than PL6. I will look forward to your review of it.
Ya I hope to look at OnOne next actually.
I think Generative AI and masking is still LR/PS's ace in the hole. Photolab renders color considerably better than Adobe, but it's still missing a few features to rely on on it solely.
if I just want something for fixing noise, should I just buy DxO PureRAW4?
or if I buy DxO PhotoLab7, do I still need to buy PureRaw4?? appreciate your input, just found out about this program after having issues with Topaz Labs and their bad denoising AI.
As I saw in the noise tests this seems to have most of SXO noise tools but I believe the latest version of pure RAW has a touch more. Thatg said LR or C! do just fine with noise. As I've showed in other videos most photos are better with some noise left in.
DxO does have presets. Moreover it lets you edit them on top of the image you are currently working on and saving the changes. Very powerful. The preset can include a LUT and all the sliders which you like to adjust as your baseline. I have ten which I've hand-rolled which I use. Saves a ton of time. Give PhotoLab presets another look. You'll have to repost this video as your main objection to PhotoLab is the absence of presets, which just isn't true. What PhotoLab is missing on the other hand, is image comparison. It's not possible to put two images side by side without export and using other software.
I'm on the opposite end as you. I'm expert in PhotoLab and competent in Lightroom (used v3 and v4 seriously).
Sorry not sure what you mean. That was not an objection. I clearly said there were presets and showed how they work. My gripe was the limits in the options when saving a preset compared to LR or C1.
Thanks for your note,@@Seimstudios. That's now what I saw in your video. At this point, you are clearly not competent in PhotoLab. At least make an effort, Seim. I've told you about the presets and what can be done with them. Go and try them. Use them, make some of your own.
I mean really, make a bit of an effort or your video is as useless as the other two hundred incompetent software comparison videos.
@@Seimstudios There are no limitations. Try to use the software as written instead of imposing the Lightroom model on top of it. If all software should be like Lightroom, why on earth would anyone use any software except Lightroom?
Your way of judging software is simply take an existing application and judge how good a clone it is of an application you already use. Poor work, Seim. You can do better.
@@Seimstudios And now instead of digging in and doing the testing properly, you feign not to understand to justify the weak review. If you won't take the time to learn a piece of software, you shouldn't be reviewing it.
You can fully customize presets in DxO, just like you showed in Lightroom. The interface is just different (you just looked in the wrong place), but the full ability to customize the presets is there, and very powerful. (I have plenty of gripes about Photolab, but preset functionality is excellent).
What version is this DXO Photolab? Is this version 8? If it isn't, have you used it and what do you think of it? Has it improved on some of the criticisms you indicated?
I am using DXO 8. It's still a decent option but almost nothing has improved and calling it V8 is really a stretch.
@@SeimstudiosI was in the middle of watching your video while reading the comments. Unfortunately, this comment about version 8 is simply untrue. There are lots of improvements.
Careful with that credibility.
Thanks for the video it was quick but I think when you added the second control point it might have been grouped/linked with the first one since the masked seemed to still show the jumper.
I do like the comparisons between the software packages - I have the LR/PS subscription which I don't find too overly expensive. I also have PL7 - like all programs there are some tools/modules that work well or work well with certain images. PL7 has some of those & it is easy to bounce back & forth to LR so I use it also. I did think this video was a little long so I watched it in pieces - maybe keeping them to around 15 minutes seems to work but I understand that some topics can't be fit into that time frame. As for people making personal comments & using profanity & just overall poor behavior & commentary - all I can say is have some grace & maturity - this is damn good free content & if you feel that Gavin talks too fast etc. or packs too much content into what he's saying there are more constructive ways to raise those points.
If I had done this in 15 you would have have gotten a complete review. This is why I don't do a lot of in depth reviews. Because people really don't have the attention span for them. Then I try to slice them tight and they say it's too fast lol
I am still using Lightroom 6.14 and PS CS6 because I refuse to pay Adobe monthly fees. Does DxO use folders like LR for both importing photos and exporting edited folders? If not, maybe I should consider On1 PhotoRaw? Thank you!
I get that. Although LR+PS are still cheaper that DXO, Capture One etc. But yes, if you simply don't want to support cloud go with something like DXO because LR6 is old now. I still support it with my presets for example. But it's getting harder every year.
I'm still using Lightroom 5 and was intending to upgrade to Lightroom Classic, but with all the issues with Adobe, I've been looking at alternatives. Lightroom Classic is quite a jump up from what I'm using. Is there one of the other programs that it similar to what I'm using that I could go over to?
Capture One is an option. But still subscription and costs more for less. DXO is a decent option for most however, though it's not as fleshed out as LR or C1
@@Seimstudios Thanks Seim, I really appreciate your recommendation. I'm just not into the subscription model, so Capture One most likely won't work for me despite being similar to Lightroom. I'll upgrade to DXO and give it a go. While almost nothing has improved as you mentioned, it is likely quite an improvement for me coming from Lightroom 5 :)
Thanks for this video. I am using DxO photoLab as a plugin for Lightroom and it is perfect. I am also using Exposure 7 . It is an excellent program that uses intelligent color masks for years. As a portrait photographer, it allow controlling skin colors and a lot of other things independently of the color position and faces positions and expressions. Concerning Adobe subscription model , it is becoming a monster everyone should avoid. Maybe a giant Boycott for Adobe products would come to be less greedy and lower the prices
There really no need to use two RAw editors. Since LR does the same things as DXO, using one inside the other is pretty redundant for any practical workflow and in the end will likely reduce image quality. But if it's working for you cool.
@@Seimstudios Months ago, the contrasts and noise controls were more efficient in DxO photo lab. I guess I kept the habit of this workflow. 👍👍😂
LR is far ahead with masking but for frustrated C1 user PL is a very good alternative as the AI tools in C1 do not really work as advertised anyway. from a core Image quality standpoint PL wins imho too because of deep prime and better color rendering compared to C1.
One very important thing you did not mention is de mozaik in which lc sucks and capture one and dxo shine
LR is equal to or better than C1 in noise and details now. I've mentioned in many times it's just the people advertising for C1 keep pretending it's better without doing the side by side reviews I have done in other videos.
@@Seimstudios Let s agree to disagree because we are not talking about the same thing 😊
I am using DXO recently on a macbook. What really annoys me is that I cant move files or virtual copies from and to projects. It only copies. Does anyone has a solution (alt, shift + drag doesnt seem to work).
Hey, thanks for doing some DxO homework for me, I am wondering about
batch processing. Is there a sync button? My workflow is about 10 to 50
shots of a setup, usually with a color checker at the beginning, so can
settings be copy/pasted, or is there another way of getting same settings
to many files?
Sync do, but ya you can copy and paste and it seems to work well.
@@Seimstudios thank you
I regularly copy and batch-paste settings for a session - then just tweak white balance or minor exposure changes.
DXO has a dedicated colour checker calibration built in to the program.
Good overall comparison review Gav. I have DxO 6 and was thinking about upgrading but have not, and after watching your comparison, I do not think I will. I also have been using ON1 Photo Raw as well. My thinking was just spend the time using one new software instead of trying to learn two different ones at the same time. I did get into mirrorless in the last year and a half, so my CS6 and LR6.14 don't work with my Nikon Z files. I was wondering what you thought of ON1 Photo Raw and if you might do a review on it and/or make your presets and packages available to use with ON1 also.
Thanks, Vinnie
Thanks. yes have played with OnOne and actually it's prob the next on on my list to compare,.
LR was a real pain to use. Super slow import process. DXO needs better masking tools but it's great otherwise.
I just posted the DXO 8 review
Thanks for this video. After going down the Darktable rabbit hole for a couple of weeks, DXO was going to be my next program to look at. I shoot a lot of bracketed photos and bracketed panoramas. Having to use another piece of software to blend the images isn't going to work for me.
Thank Seim for this video. However, it's outdated because Photo lab 8 has been released. If possible, could you please do another video Lightroom & Photolab 8? Thanks again.
Ya I saw that. Gonna look as see if there's anything significant.
One thing all (Lightroom excluded) of the photo editing software have in common is the horrendous UX and UI design. DXO makes no exception.
Mostly the truth. Just uploaded a DXO 8 review
The only thing that would impress me and have me dropping every other program for Photolab is if photolab had a AI precision masking tool, the other apps have it, but photolab is still behind in this? Why? It’s frustrating to see them focus on every other feature expect for AI masking. What’s the point of all these features if I can’t easily make a targeted selection?
Everyone is behind LR in this. Even C!'s Ai offerings are not even close
@@Seimstudios Right, and as much as I like how better Capture One processes the images, and the abilities of DXO, LR is still superior in workflow and targeted adjustments. LR also just feels right, it feels comfortable using it! But PH and C1 doesn’t seem to care about design and workflow and integration.
I have Lightroom never tried DXO Photo Lab I might give it a try but I use a Affinity Photo and have so for years its not prefect but they recently become part of Canva group. You have mentioned Affinity Photo but you have never done any videos or any comparisons on them or where you think they need to be for pro uses.
I've mentioned affinity and looked at it briefly in my videos. But it's so far from Photoshop for pro level work
Have you tried or/and reviewed Nitro?
No I'll check it out
The number one reason I use PhotoLab is that it demosaic Raws better than Lightroom. It looks better, full stop.
Just tested it and from what I can tell it's no better. IN fact in the hard light test I use an all these appas LR did a bit better. Still it did a good job.
@@SeimstudiosPL demosaicing is literally the best available. I suspect you don’t understand how to test it.
Not worth it... new license 230 euros, upgrade every year 100 euros. Only one program... Adobe gives PS, LR, cloud for 120 a year. Dxo's greed knows no limits. A lot of people give up because it's really funny
Ehhh your not forced to upgrade every year. You can probably easy skip a version or 2. Same goes with cameras. You can 100% take great photos with an older camera.
Yes you right, i use adobe and silkypix pro 11, i dont care about UA-cam People Who now begin promote dxo,. Not listen to Them
In addition, if you skip DXO's upgrades to the new version, you will lose the right to a discounted upgrade and will have to pay the full price for the new version. In reality, you won’t save money by using DXO compared to, for example, Adobe Lightroom. Or maybe you will save if you skip a few years of version upgrades.
But you listen to them, otherwise you would not make that comment.
A subscription program for your camera is definitely coming. Mark my words, it's gonna be Sony that figures it out first :D
Software has always been a license to use it since it started with the first PCs. Adobe does not shot down LR when you stop paying it and gives you a year with no updates. I own DXO and consider it a yearly subscription as they come out with a new version every year around Christmas time with a Black Friday sale. I upgraded from DXO 6 to 7 for $89 last year and there was NOT $89 of updates. I will continue to use LR as it is the best DAM application for my 1 million photos in my catalog.
LR is good. But you're remembering how software worked when we bought it. If you stop paying for LR it will stop working in 30 days and you will be locked out of your photos.
Buying vs subscriptcion - Subscriptcions cost a very small amount monthly and you have all the new opdates, buying cost a lot DXO8 about 300 Euro if you use a Fujifilm camera (you need the elite edition + the filmpack) then after 6 - 12 months you probely need or want to upgrade again for last fuctions and supportet cameras and lenses. So the buying version will be same expencive like the monthly payments. DXO 8 is nice but still fare behind Lightroom and Photoshop in posibilities it cost only monthly US$9.99. Its a no brainer.
True if price is your only factor. But a lot just want to get away from Adobe .
@@Seimstudios I did not say price is the only factor, but also its fare behind Lightroom/Photoshop in relevant posibillities. However its a grait RAW coverter if thats all you need.
@@terjegronli142it’s actually not behind LR in image quality. Maybe some workflow items for those addicted to AI. Or, if you’re big on compositing. Of course, that’s fine if that’s what you want.
But PL demosaicing, noise handling, soft lens management, and overall image quality output isn’t second to anyone.
Kira Fall
I dont care what i use.
Raul Glens
Theresa Junction
Wolff Rue
PhotoLab 8 just came out with some nice new improvements - sadly, the spots you’ve 😮 dinged them on hasn't really changed much.
There's the newer deep prime XD2 (but doesn't _yet_ support Fuji.
I saw that. I'll take a look but these companies almost never listen to pros about this stuff. That's why they never catch up to adobe.
Beatty Path
Littel Roads
Zulauf Ports
I never use presets, really are all your images expised so much like one another that presets work?
Exposure should not be used in a preset in general. But the presets I create don't have an equal in the industry.
Not using presets just means you're getting less creative edits honestly. It's fine to make your own, but not using presets is less consistency , less speed and less creative control. It just means you're not using the software.
Instead of digging in and doing the testing properly, you feign not to understand to justify the weak review. If you won't take the time to learn a piece of software, you shouldn't be reviewing it. You can do better.
(this is a comment buried in replies above; it should be top-level)
Nothing weak about my review. Im, an expert in Raw editing. That's why I review software for it. This review is quite fair and not even negative so honestly I don't known what your on about bro.
@@Seimstudios Based on this review, you've spent a tiny amount of time with DxO PhotoLab, not opened the manual and have no clue about how PhotoLab presets work.
The saddest part is you think you've made an unbiased review, when it's completely Lightroom and C1 centric without much notion of how to do good work in PhotoLab and less idea on how to work efficiently in PhotoLab.
Saying you are an expert does not make you an expert, showing expertise makes an expert an expert.
Why don't I tell you how to work better in PhotoLab? - I am. Go and work again with the Presets function which is very, very powerful. Create the presets you need and you can start any kind of photo edit very quickly and in the right place.
Oh and make sure to customise your toolsets to put the tools you actually use in basic view and in the order you use them. But nothing extra. Tools you use more rarely you can dig out of Light, Colour, Detail, Geometry when needed.
You’re not speaking fast at all dw
Forget about the idea, perpetual license is an illusion. we are always controlled by software company and will be in the future no matter what choice you make. Nothing is perpetual, no,. I had been using Apple Aperture before Adobe has lightroom. Apple stopped update and Aperture version I "owned" no longer supported in newer OS, no support for newer camera model. I bought Nik ware back it the day it costed 499US, if I have to use it today, I still need to pay DXO. Someday you have to pay again, you have to migrate somewhere. Welcome to the real world.
Darktable.
Problem is it's very primitive
@@Seimstudios it's actually not, what's "primitive" is Lightroom in this case
Rawtherapee handles large folders of raw files bet😢ter than darktable on my Mac, which makes culling much better in RT vs DT. I used both extensively. Now transferred what I learned to LR and it's just so much faster for editing. The UX difference is substantial and I think that's what he means by 'primitive' as I would agree. Both DT and RT are primitive - powerful but primitive.
@@TheLocalredhead Maybe it's a mac problem, because I have completely different experience - even on my travel laptop, which is pretty weak, DT handles photos without any problems. UI is just a matter of habit and muscle memory, but I can agree - FOSS applications are very technical at times because they are usually made by technical guys, personally, I like this approach. In terms of color science and overall workflow DT is far superior.
Should learn how to say prowess tbh.
I'm good. But thanks :)
Who doesn't care what platform or device you are using to work on? Adobe. Who only works with a computer and a very few iPads? Everyone else.
Being dependent on a computer for working, is like still living in mom's basement.
I'm sure this is a good video with solid information. Sadly I didnt make it past the 5 minute mark because of your sheer pace. Chill the fuck out dude :D
I dont mean this in a bad way, you seem like you know a fuckton and have loads of value to give, but it's simply too much information.. and the video is looong!
I think you could learn something regarding pacing from Simon d'Entremont. He packs loads of knowledge into his videos aswell, but he does so in a calmer and more distilled way. Also his videos are shorter. I think you'd benefit greatly from this!
Sorry bro. You can have an overview or a thorough review. Not both. I have plenty of short videos but it didn't work here. The problem is people no longer have an attention span thanks to TikTok
Did you have to go to the bathroom urgently, or why are you talking so fast and so hectic!?
Not talking too fast, but I don’t like how all the umms and aaahhs have been edited out. Please keep them so your speech sounds natural. And leave a little pause when you change thoughts. It sounds like one long paragraph.
Offended much? Or just replicating what your parents tells you?
Sorry I thought i was clear and paced, You can slow the video down a little. There's no umms and uhhs edited out, I just don't say them.